111-PC - 10 Study Session Report 10-01-2013.pdf
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
CITY HALL
10UPERTINO, CA 95014-3255
TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3308 www.cupertino.org
JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION
STAFF REPORT
Meeting: October 1, 2013
Subject
Study Session for the Environmental Impact Report for the development of a new office,
research and development campus
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council and Planning Commission review and receive
comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR). The Final EIR consists of the
Response to Comments Document (which includes minor text revisions to the Draft EIR)
published in September 2013 (Attachment SS-1) and the Draft EIR published in June 2013
(Attachment SS-2).
Description
Demolition of approximately 2.66 million square feet of existing office, research and
development buildings and the construction of 3.42 million square feet of office, research, and
development buildings; 245,000 square feet of auditorium (1,000 seat), fitness center, and Valet
Parking Reception uses; 92,000 square feet of utility plants; and associated parking facilities and
ancillary buildings (such as security reception areas and landscape maintenance buildings
Discussion
Background
The proposed project is located in the North Vallco Specific Plan Area and encompasses
approximately 176 acres. The project is bounded by East Homestead Road, North Tantau
Avenue, I-280 and North Wolfe Road. The project excludes the Hamptons Apartments
(Hamptons) located at the north-east intersection of I-280 and North Wolfe Road. In addition,
properties on the east side of North Tantau Avenue, both north and south of Pruneridge
Avenue are part of the project site. See figure on the right.
The project site includes approximately 4.6 acres that is currently occupied by Pruneridge
Avenue, which Apple is proposing that the City vacate.
Study Session for Apple 2 Campus EIROctober 1, 2013
Page 2
The surrounding land uses include:
To the north: Primarily single family residential uses in the City of Sunnyvale
To the east: Office, research and development facilities are located along the north-east
end of the project site. Single family residential uses in the City of Santa Clara are located
directly to the east of the project site. Jenny Strand park, also in the City of Santa Clara is
located south-east of the project site, abutting the I-280 freeway.
To the south: I-280 freeway
with the Hamptons
Apartments located to the
south-west of and adjacent to
the project site. Vallco
Shopping Mall, residential
condominiums and additional
office, research and
development buildings are
located south of the freeway.
Many of these office, research
and development buildings
are currently occupied by
Apple.
To the west: The Cupertino
Village shopping center is
located across from North
Wolfe Road in addition to two hotels and one apartment complex. Single family homes,
predominantly in the City of Sunnyvale, are located further west.
Proposed Project
The project applicant proposes to construct the project in two phases. The first phase of
construction will include the development of the properties bounded by Homestead Road, N.
Tantau Avenue, Calabazas Creek, I-280, and N. Wolfe Road and the property located on the
northeast corner of Pruneridge Avenue and N. Tantau Avenue. This will include the
construction of:
2.82 million square foot ring-shaped main building with basement parking,
100,000 square foot fitness center,
120,000 square foot auditorium,
Approximately 5,870 parking space main parking structure,
Approximately 765 space auditorium parking structure with 25,000 square foot valet
reception area,50,000 square foot central plant,
2,000 square foot visitor center/security reception structures,
5,000 square foot of landscaping maintenance buildings
Study Session for Apple 2 Campus EIR October 1, 2013
Page 3
The second phase of construction will include the development of the property between
Calabazas Creek and N. Tantau Avenue on the west side of N. Tantau Avenue and the
properties between Pruneridge Avenue and I-280 on the east side of N. Tantau Avenue. This
will include the construction of 600,000 square feet of office and research and development
buildings with 1,740 parking stalls and two satellite plants for energy generation.
Proposed Off-site Improvements
Apple is proposing to make a number of off-site improvements. Key improvements are
discussed below. Some will involve acquisition of property. A detailed discussion is provided
in the EIR.
N. Wolfe Road between East Homestead Road and I-280 off-ramps:
o Widen the street to add travel lanes to increase capacity. This widening would occur
on the east side of the roadway.
o Add buffered bike lanes to improve bicyclist experience (where feasible), and
o Provide detached sidewalks where feasible to improve pedestrian experience.
N. Wolfe Road between I-280 Overcrossing and Stevens Creek Boulevard:
o Restripe the existing right of way at the overcrossing to allow for bike lanes by
modifying the existing shoulder stripes,
o Provide enhanced paving, guardrails, pedestrian-scale lighting and decorative
fencing at the overcrossing, and
o Provide a bus layover stop on northbound N. Wolfe Road north of Stevens Creek
Boulevard for Route 81 (the bus line is being rerouted due to the closure of a
segment of Pruneridge Avenue)
East Homestead Road:
o Installation of a landscaped central median
North Tantau Avenue between Homestead Road and I-280 Overcrossing:
o Widen street and/or restripe existing right-of-way in some street segments to add
travel lanes to accommodate project traffic,
o Provide buffered bike lanes,
o Provide detached sidewalks, and
o Provide landscaped median
North Tantau Avenue between I-280 Overcrossing and Vallco Parkway:
o Restripe existing right of way to allow two travel lanes in each direction,
o Provide buffered bike lanes, and
o Provide enhanced paving, guardrails, pedestrian-scale lighting, and decorative
fencing at the I-280 overcrossing (alternate creek trail route)
Vallco Parkway:
o Restripe the existing right-of-way to allow two lanes of travel in each direction and
left-turn lanes at intersections, to accommodate project traffic,
o Provide bike lanes,
Study Session for Apple 2 Campus EIR October 1, 2013
Page 4
o Provide detached sidewalks, and
o Provide a landscaped median.
Freeway Off-ramps:
o Widen the Northbound and Southbound I-280 freeway off-ramps at North Wolfe
Road from the freeway mainline to the street to reduce the impact of the increased
traffic volumes exiting at this interchange.
Calabazas Creek Trail:
o Provide a creek trail along Vallco Parkway and N. Tantau Avenue with enhanced
paving, trail improvements, landscaping, lighting and signage.
Terminus of Pruneridge at Tantau Avenue:
o Provide a distinctive project entry at the terminus of Pruneridge Avenue at N.
Tantau Avenue with architectural elements and landscaping.
Pruneridge Avenue from N Wolfe to Hamptons Apartment complex driveway:
o Reduce width to one lane in each direction
o Separated sidewalks along the Apple project site frontage
Development Agreement
Apple is proposing a 20-year Development Agreement with the City of Cupertino. A
Development Agreement ensures development rights for the applicant for a set period of time
and establishes an understanding between the applicant and the City of Cupertino regarding
financing and construction of infrastructure, scope of development, the applicable development
standards and regulations, and other issues relating to the proposed project.
Jobs and Economic Improvement through Environmental Leadership Act of 2011 (AB900)
In June 2012, the proposed Apple Campus 2 Project was certified as the state’s first
Environmental Leadership Development Project (Leadership Project) by the Governor's Office
pursuant to the Jobs and Economic Improvement Through Environmental Leadership Act of
2011 (AB 900). A key requirement of AB 900 is that the California Air Resources Board (CARB)
verifies that the project does not result in any net additional emission of greenhouse gases,
including greenhouse gas emissions from employee transportation. On June 14, 2012, CARB
verified that the project will not result in any net additional greenhouse gases prior to
certification by the Governor.
In 2013, Apple updated the project with some changes to the plans. CARB and the Governor’s
Office reviewed the changes and found that the project still meets the requirements to qualify as
a Leadership Project for purposes of AB 900. In order to be certified as a Leadership Project, the
project must meet the requirements of Public Resources Code Sections 21180(b) and 21183,
including but not limited to being certified LEED silver or better, located on an infill site,
resulting in a minimum investment of $1,000,000 upon completion of construction, creating
high-wage/highly skilled jobs that pay prevailing wages and living wages, providing
construction and permanent jobs that help reduce unemployment, does not result in any net
Study Session for Apple 2 Campus EIR October 1, 2013
Page 5
additional greenhouse gas emissions, and the applicant enters into a binding and enforceable
agreement that all mitigation measures required to be certified as a Leadership Project shall be
conditions of project approval.
Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that all State and local governments
consider the consequences of projects over which they have discretionary authority. The EIR
created as a result of review under CEQA must disclose the significant environmental impacts
of the project and, in addition, identify the following:
Significant cumulative impacts of the project in combination with past, present and
reasonably foreseeable future projects.
Mitigation measures and alternatives to reduce these effects;
Significant impacts that cannot be avoided;
Growth-inducing impacts; and
Effects found not to be significant.
CEQA provides for one agency to be the Lead Agency charged with the responsibility of
preparing the EIR. In this case, because the City of Cupertino will have the greatest
responsibility for approving the project as a whole, the City is the Lead Agency.
A Final EIR has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The purpose of the EIR is not to recommend approval or
denial of a project but to provide information to be used in the planning and decision-making
process. CEQA requires decision makers to balance the benefits of a proposed project against
the environmental effects, along with other factors.
Prior to approving the project elements, the Planning Commission must decide whether to
recommend that the City Council certify that the Final EIR was prepared in compliance with
CEQA and whether to recommend that the City Council approve the General Plan Amendment,
Rezoning, Development Agreement, Vesting Tentative Map and associated permits required to
allow development of the project. The Commission’s recommendations will be forwarded to the
City Council for action. The City Council will review the Final EIR for adequacy and will
exercise its independent judgment regarding certification. If the Council certifies the Final EIR,
it will then consider whether to approve the General Plan Amendment and Rezoning,
Development Agreement, Vesting Tentative Map, Development Permit, Use Permit,
Architectural and Site Approval for Phase 1 of the project (except for the N. Tantau parking
structure), a Tree Removal Permit, and street and easement vacations. As part of this approval,
findings on the feasibility of reducing or avoiding significant environmental effects will be
made, including a Statement of Overriding Considerations balancing the benefits of the project
against is unavoidable environmental risks.
Study Session for Apple 2 Campus EIR October 1, 2013
Page 6
EIR Process and Public Outreach
The EIR process started with the issuance of the Notice of Preparation for the EIR on August 19,
2011. A scoping session was held on September 8, 2011 to allow the public an opportunity to
comment on the topics that should be studied in the Draft EIR. Public comments were collected
through October 5, 2011 when the scoping period for the EIR ended.
The City also established a website for the project in August 2011 where all project-related
documents including plans, the Draft EIR and comments on the project and the EIR were
posted for public review. The Draft EIR was made available for a 46-day public comment period
between June 6, 2013 and July 22, 2013. The Notice of Completion of the Draft EIR was sent to
the State Clearinghouse in the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research on June 6, 2013. The
Notice of Availability (NOA) was filed with the Santa Clara County Clerk-Recorder on the same
day. The NOA was also:
1.Sent to other potentially affected agencies,
2.Mailed to adjacent property owners, and
3.Posted at the project site and at City Hall
Postcards were mailed to all postal customers in the City of Cupertino and to property owners
within 1,000 feet of the project site. A half-page notice was also published in the Cupertino
Courier. In addition, notification regarding the availability of the Draft EIR was made available
www.cupertino.org/applecampus2). About 2,000 interested parties
online at the project website (
who had indicated that they would like to receive electronic updates about the project received
an update. The public was encouraged to provide input regarding the adequacy of the Draft
EIR electronically. In addition, a public meeting was held on June 26, 2013 to allow the public
additional opportunity to provide input.
Over 300 comments were received during the public review period of the Draft EIR. Responses
to the written comments received during that period regarding the adequacy of the Draft EIR
have been prepared and compiled in a Response to Comments Document (which includes
minor text revisions to the Draft EIR). This document together with the Draft EIR is considered
to be the Final EIR. The Final EIR was posted on September 23, 2013.
Notice of Availability of the Final EIR was sent to the Santa Clara County Clerk Recorder’s
Office, posted at City Hall and the project site, and sent to 10 local libraries and property
owners, business owners and residents within 1,000 feet of the project site. A courtesy notice
regarding the availability of the Final EIR was also published in the Mercury News.
Comments collected after the close of the EIR public review period will continue to be provided
to the Planning Commission and Council.
Study Session for Apple 2 Campus EIR October 1, 2013
Page 7
Additional Project Outreach
A brief summary of additional outreach on the project is presented in the table below:
Notice of Public Hearing, Site Notice & Legal Ad Agenda
Site Signage (14 days prior to the hearing) Posted on the City's official notice
Legal ad placed in the Mercury News bulletin board
(at least 10 days prior to the hearing)(one week prior to the hearing)
750 notices mailed to property owners Posted on the City of Cupertino’s
within 1000 feet of the project site Website
(10 days prior to the hearing) Advertised on the City Channel
All interested parties (emailed/noticed)
(at least 10 days prior to the hearing)
The City also conducted further additional community outreach by:
Sending three courtesy postcards to approximately 21,000 mailing addresses (generally,
all postal customers in the City of Cupertino and those persons who reside or have a
business within 1000 feet of the project site.) These postcards were sent to:
o Inform the recipients about a date for the scoping meeting in anticipation of the
preparation of the EIR;
o Notify the public about the availability of the Draft EIR and the public review period;
and
o Announce the availability of the Final EIR, this joint Study Session of the Council and
Planning Commission, the Planning Commission meeting held on October 2, 2013,
and the two City Council meetings to be tentatively held on October 15, 2013 and
November 19, 2013.
Facilitating community meetings:
o A Scoping Meeting was held on September 8, 2011 to collect comments on identifying
the scope of study of the EIR.
o A public meeting was held on June 26, 2013 to inform the public about the EIR and
allow an opportunity for interested persons to provide comments electronically or on
a comment card. Over 125 Universal Serial Bus (USB) thumb drives with digital
copies of the Draft EIR were handed out to attendees at this meeting.
Handing out several hundred business cards with Quick Response (QR) codes which,
when scanned, links directly to the project website and the URL directing people to the
Apple Campus 2 website over the course of the public review period of the Draft EIR.
Making comment cards and repositories for such cards available at City facilities, such as
City Hall, Quinlan Community Center, Sports Center, Senior Center and Blackberry
Farm.
A legal advertisement for the notification of the intent to vacate the portion of Pruneridge
Avenue through the proposed campus, along with various easements will be placed in the
Study Session for Apple 2 Campus EIR October 1, 2013
Page 8
Cupertino Courier in late September 2013 and early October 2013. A notice will also be posted
in the project area a minimum of 14 days prior to the vacation hearing.
Apple has communicated that it has conducted the following additional neighborhood outreach
regarding the project:
Provided regular updates to residents in Cupertino and neighboring residents in
Sunnyvale and Santa Clara (approximately 20,000 addresses.) Apple provided prepaid
response cards and emailed contact information with these campus information
packages.
Convened over 140 stakeholder outreach meetings ranging from one-on-one to large
groups.
Met with over 20 neighborhood groups and organizations and over 2,000 stakeholders,
including Cupertino, Sunnyvale and Santa Clara residents, businesses and other
community groups.
Sent email updates on the project to more than 2,000 interested persons and entities.
Key Significance Findings and Mitigations
Revised Table II-1, Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures from the EIR, in the Response
to Comments Document, along with Table II-1 of the Draft EIR summarize all significant project
impacts and mitigation measures. This staff report highlights key findings only. The list of
mitigation measures does not include requirements (such as compliance with the International
Building Code) that are routinely applied to new development.
The EIR has identified mitigation measures for all significant impacts. However, even with
mitigations, some significant impacts would remain significant and have been determined to be
significant and unavoidable. In some cases, the significant impacts have been determined to be
significant and unavoidable because the mitigation measures require approval from a
governmental agency other than the City of Cupertino (e.g., the City of Santa Clara, Caltrans,
etc.) and are not within the responsibility and jurisdiction of the City. If approval is not granted
by that agency for implementation of the mitigation measure, the significant impact would
remain and would, therefore, be considered significant and unavoidable. In other cases, a
significant impact is unavoidable because the significant impact would not be fully mitigated by
the mitigation measure identified.
This section highlights key findings. Details are provided in the Final EIR. Following is a
summary of issues:
1.Land Use
a.Rezoning
The proposed project also includes the rezoning of a 1.1 acre portion of the site from Parks
and Recreation (PR) to Planned Development (Planned Industrial) P (MP). With this change
Study Session for Apple 2 Campus EIR October 1, 2013
Page 9
in designation, the acreage of land designated for future parks in the City will be reduced.
As a mitigation measure, the applicant shall either provide enough funds for the acquisition
of 1.1 acres of property by the City for future park development or agree to purchase (unless
other property currently owned by the applicant is proposed), designate, dedicate to the
City and make publicly accessible 1.1 acres elsewhere in the City as Parks and Recreation
(PR). This mitigation measure would reduce the significant impact due to the rezoning of
the property to a less-than-significant level. The rezoning of the park has been identified as a
significant impact in the Land Use, Planning Policy and Public Services and Utilities
sections of the EIR.
b.Calabazas Creek Trail
The City’s General Plan indicates that a trail should be provided along Calabazas Creek
when property in that area develops. The project applicant has significant security concerns
with a trail along Calabazas Creek, which runs through the project site, due to the attributes
of the project and its uses. Therefore, as a mitigation measure, the applicant would build an
alternate creek trail sharing the public sidewalk between the intersection of Pruneridge
Avenue and North Tantau Avenue and Calabazas Creek at Vallco Parkway. The trail will
include appropriate landscaping, signage, pavement treatment that references the creek
and/or water and decorative fencing at the Tantau Avenue overcrossing at I-280.
The mitigation measure also includes the payment of $250,000 to study the feasibility of a
trail along an existing drainage channel that runs parallel to southbound I-280 between N.
De Anza Boulevard and Calabazas Creek and then south along the western bank of the
Calabazas Creek to Vallco Parkway. However, even with these mitigations, the proposed
project does not fully implement the provisions of the Environmental
Resources/Sustainability Element of the General Plan related to the provision of trails and
the provision of bike and pedestrian access, resulting in a significant and unavoidable
impact.
2.Biological Resources
The applicant is proposing the removal of a maximum of 3,620 trees and relocation of at least 90
trees with the proposed project. The trees removed will be replaced with at least 6,200 Protected
Trees in accordance with the City’s Protected Tree Ordinance (for a net increase of 2,494 trees).
Trees planted on site will be considered “protected” per the City’s definition of Protected Trees.
Trees relocated include a Memorial tree dedicated to a former HP employee, a 33-inch diameter
Oak tree and several large redwood trees (19 inches – 25 inches in diameter) that are planted in
a grove around the current Glendenning Barn location. The consulting arborist has confirmed
that the tree replacement plan proposed by the applicant is consistent with the City’s Protected
Tree Ordinance requirements.
3.Cultural Resources
The General Plan identifies the Glendenning Barn, which is located on the project site, as a
historic resource in the City. The project proposes to relocate the barn either on- or off-site. The
Study Session for Apple 2 Campus EIR October 1, 2013
Page 10
Draft EIR concludes that with implementation of mitigation measures identified this would be a
less-than-significant impact.
Mitigation measures related to the possibility of affecting archaeological resources are typical
for new development, requiring the retention of a qualified archaeologist to monitor the
ground-breaking activities and the preparation of a monitoring plan for the project. The
mitigation measure provides direction with regard to reporting the discovery of archaeological
resources on the site, including when the archaeological monitor is not present at the site.
Mitigation measures have also been identified related to the possibility of affecting
paleontological resources or Native American remains.
4.Transportation
As required by CEQA, the impacts of the project on traffic are compared to the impacts of
“existing conditions” at the project site on traffic. These “existing conditions” are the physical
environmental conditions in the vicinity of the project as of the date of publication of the EIR
Notice of Preparation. At the time the Notice of Publication was published, the occupancy of the
site was less than full occupancy of the project site buildings because many HP and Apple
employees had already been relocated away from the site. Thus, the severity of impacts
identified in the EIR is magnified compared to an analysis that evaluates the project against full
occupancy of existing buildings. The analysis uses the following data regarding net employee
impacts, trip distribution and trip generation for Apple Campus 2:
While the employee capacity of the existing buildings is 9,800, the EIR uses an employee
count of 4,844 (the number of employees working at the project site at the time of issuance
of the Notice of Preparation) as the baseline for the impact analysis. The analysis is more
conservative than Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) guidelines, which allow for
“existing conditions” to include maximum occupancy of the existing buildings on a
project site. However, this full occupancy was addressed as part of the “Background”
scenario in the EIR.
Trip distribution for the project has been based on the current employee distribution
provided by the applicant. When this information is available, it provides for a much
higher level of accuracy with regards to expected travel patterns to and from the site.
Apple currently has a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program participation
level of 28% non-single occupancy vehicles, meaning that 28% of their existing employees
use alternative modes of transportation such as buses, bikes, carpools, walking and public
transportation. Apple is proposing to increase their TDM program to a 34% participation
level for the proposed project. The 34% TDM level will be a condition of approval for the
project and will reduce the severity of identified traffic impacts.
Trip generation has been based on the actual trip generation data collected at Apple’s
Infinite Loop campus and additional buildings leased/controlled by Apple located south
of Mariani Avenue.
Study Session for Apple 2 Campus EIR October 1, 2013
Page 11
The traffic study analyzes the project under three scenarios:
The Existing plus project scenario analyzes the impacts of the project traffic combined
with existing traffic volumes at the study intersections;
The Background plus project scenario analyzes the impacts of the project traffic combined
with existing traffic volumes plus projected traffic volumes from projects approved but
not built and projects for which applications are under review;
The Cumulative plus project scenario studies the impacts of the project traffic combined
with existing traffic volumes, plus background traffic volumes, plus traffic volumes from
reasonably foreseeable future development projects. For this EIR, the cumulative scenario
studied is the year 2020, since the City of Cupertino’s General Plan currently covers this
time frame and the applicant has indicated that all phases of the project are expected to be
completed before the year 2020.
Intersection Impacts:
a.
There are ten intersections where impacts have been identified to be significant. Six of these
are within Cupertino:
De Anza Boulevard and Homestead Road – Background plus Project
Stevens Creek Boulevard and De Anza Boulevard – Cumulative plus Project
Stevens Creek Boulevard and Tantau Avenue – Background plus Project
Wolfe Road and Vallco Parkway - Cumulative plus Project
Vallco Parkway and N. Tantau Avenue - Existing plus Project
Homestead Road and N. Tantau Avenue - Background plus Project
Mitigation measures have been identified at five of six intersections within the City’s
jurisdiction, which would mitigate the impacts to a less-than-significant level. The sixth
intersection at De Anza Boulevard and Stevens Creek Boulevard will continue to have
significant unavoidable impacts at the Cumulative plus Project scenario. This is because the
identified mitigation measure of funding a fair share toward the installation of advanced
traffic signal equipment along the De Anza Boulevard corridor will help lessen the severity
of the impact. However, it will not reduce the impact at this intersection to a less-than-
significant level. The provision of an exclusive southbound right-turn lane from southbound
De Anza Boulevard to westbound Stevens Creek Boulevard, which would reduce the
impact, would not be feasible due to physical constraints of an existing building at the
intersection.
Four of the intersections with significant impacts are outside the City’s jurisdiction:
Wolfe Road @ I-280 Northbound ramps (Caltrans) – Existing plus Project
Stevens Creek @ Calvert Drive & I-280 ramps (west) (City of Santa Clara) - Existing
plus Project
Study Session for Apple 2 Campus EIR October 1, 2013
Page 12
Stevens Creek Boulevard @ Lawrence Expressway Ramps (east) (County of Santa
Clara)- Background plus Project
Lawrence Expressway @ I-280 Southbound ramps (County of Santa Clara/Caltrans) -
Background plus Project
Mitigation measures have also been identified for the four intersections outside the City’s
jurisdiction. However, implementation of the identified mitigation measures cannot be
guaranteed at these intersections. The agencies responsible for approving improvements at
these intersections have the ultimate discretion to approve the improvements which would
mitigate the impact to a less-than-significant level at these intersections.
b.Freeway Segment Impacts:
The EIR also notes a significant impact at 29 mixed-flow freeway segments and 3 High
Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) freeway segments. The identified mitigation measure requires
the project applicant to pay $1,292,215 as a fair share contribution toward planned
transportation projects that would improve traffic operations of the impacted freeway
segments and provide added transportation capacity on parallel facilities: (1) SR 85 Express
Lane project (converting the existing HOV lane to a toll lane to allow single occupant
vehicles to drive in the HOV lane for a fee) between Mountain View and San Jose, (2)
eliminating the existing bottleneck on southbound I-280 between El Monte Avenue and
Magdelena Avenue; and (3) either the Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) stations proposed within
Cupertino, or an alternative improvement or study towards the improvement of the
impacted I-280 corridor or a parallel corridor that would provide capacity.
c.Corridor Operations:
Wolfe Road
The EIR also identifies an impact due to the proposed project design at the project access
driveway on Wolfe Road. The project proposes three left turns turning on to southbound
Wolfe Road. The traffic consultant prepared a traffic progression model for the Wolfe Road
corridor between Homestead Road and Vallco Parkway. The three left turns would create
potential safety impacts due to weaving that is anticipated as vehicles turning left from the
project driveway onto southbound Wolfe Road attempt to merge within a short distance to
access the I-280 freeway ramps. The Final EIR includes the following mitigations:
The recommended mitigation would require the project sponsor to redesign the
driveway to include only two left turn lanes.
The alternate mitigation would allow for the construction of three left turn lanes, but
would require the implementation of a program to monitor the operation of the lanes
up to 9 months after full occupancy of the project, with penalties for the occurrence of
unsafe weaving. If, after monitoring, the City determines that the three left turn lanes
pose long-term safety problems, the project sponsor would be required to reduce the
number of left-turn lanes from three to two.
Study Session for Apple 2 Campus EIR October 1, 2013
Page 13
The model indicated that there would be delays to non-Apple traffic traveling in the
southbound direction during the PM peak hour due to the large volume of Apple vehicles
that would exit the campus during this time. However, these delays are not identified as
impacts under CEQA since there are currently no thresholds of significance for operational
delay, as there are for intersection Level of Service (LOS).
Vallco Parkway
The traffic consultant also prepared a traffic progression model for Vallco Parkway between
Wolfe Road and Tantau Avenue. The model showed that the currently approved
improvements on Vallco Parkway result in excessive delays in the eastbound direction.
This is not a CEQA impact but is an operational issue due to increased project traffic. As a
result, the traffic consultant recommends a reconfiguration of Vallco Parkway, between
Perimeter Road and N. Tantau Avenue to provide two eastbound travel lanes, two
westbound travel lanes, bike lanes in each direction, and an additional traffic light at the
Main Street parking garage entrance. This configuration would preserve the street parking
improvements approved for adjacent projects along Vallco Parkway.
d.Impacts to Pedestrians:
In addition to traffic impacts, the EIR also identifies significant and unavoidable impacts to
pedestrians. Due to the need to provide two right turn lanes into the project site, a
significant impact has been identified for pedestrians even with the implementation of a
feasible mitigation measure. Additionally, a significant and unavoidable impact is identified
at the six off-/on-ramps for I-280 on N. Wolfe Road due to the increased traffic volumes. The
closure of Pruneridge Avenue (discussed later) would also result in significant impacts to
pedestrian facilities. However, the project will be improving pedestrian conditions at many
locations, including the provision of detached sidewalks in various locations, as well as the
removal of “pork chop” islands at the Homestead Road/Tantau Avenue and Stevens Creek
Boulevard/Tantau Avenue intersections. A “pork chop” island allows free right-turns by
vehicles without stopping at the traffic light and makes it difficult for pedestrians to cross.
Removing the “pork chop” islands will require cars to stop at the traffic light before turning
right and make it safer for pedestrians.
Cut-Through Traffic
e.
The potential cut-through routes for the neighborhood to the north of Homestead Road in
Sunnyvale and to the east of Tantau Avenue in Santa Clara do not represent routes that are
superior to routes on the main arterials and collectors. Therefore, the potential for cut-
through traffic would not rise to the level of a significant impact.
While not required as mitigation for the project, the a condition of approval will require the
applicant to fund a neighborhood cut-through traffic study and provide funds to implement
traffic calming improvements and neighborhood permit parking programs in the amount of
$250,000 to the City of Santa Clara and $500,000 to the City of Sunnyvale.
Study Session for Apple 2 Campus EIR October 1, 2013
Page 14
f.Parking
While parking availability is not considered to an environmental impact under CEQA, the
secondary environmental impacts from the lack of parking or excess parking are considered
environmental impacts. Therefore, the EIR discusses parking for informational purposes
and to evaluate secondary environmental impacts.
Apple proposes to provide 10,980 parking spaces on its campus to meet the parking
demand for its use. Anticipated parking demand was determined by conducting a parking
study of Apple’s current campus at Infinite Loop and properties at Mariani Avenue. The
parking ratio assumes a TDM rate of 34% as proposed by the project. Of these spaces, 9,240
spaces will be provided with the development of Phase 1 in two structured parking
facilities, the basement of the main building and two surface parking lots. The balance, 1,740
parking spaces to serve the 600,000 square feet of development located on the properties
east and west of N. Tantau Avenue, will be provided in Phase 2 of the project.
The Parking ordinance requires the provision of bicycle parking at 5% of the number of
required vehicular parking. Apple would be required to provide 600 spaces for both phases.
Apple plans to locate bicycle parking spaces in convenient areas around the entire campus.
A total of at least 2,000 bicycle parking spaces will be provided as part of the project.
A parking management plan is required to allow the proper management of parking during
special events at the Auditorium.
Neighborhood Parking
The EIR discusses the issue of neighborhood parking and evaluates secondary
environmental impacts to neighborhoods surrounding the project site. The EIR concludes
that adequate parking is being provided for the project based on actual parking data
collected for the same use at Apple’s Infinite Loop and Mariani Avenue campus. Therefore,
no significant environmental impacts are expected and there is no significant indication that
neighborhood parking will be an environmental impact issue. While not required as
mitigation for the project, the funds provided by the applicant in the amount of $250,000 to
the City of Santa Clara and $500,000 to the City of Sunnyvale (discussed above in the cut-
through traffic section) can be used to pay for permit parking programs, if deemed
necessary by the respective cities. In addition, a condition of the project requires the
applicant to identify and construct additional on-site parking, subject to further
environmental review, if parking monitoring studies subsequently identify a persistent
shortage of project parking.
Pruneridge Avenue Vacation and Closure
g.
The project applicant is proposing the vacation and closure of a segment of Pruneridge
Avenue, between N. Tantau Avenue and N. Wolfe Road. While the applicant is proposing
to make upgrades to the existing pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure around the project
site and along Vallco Parkway, no equivalent east-west connector is being provided. The
Study Session for Apple 2 Campus EIR October 1, 2013
Page 15
removal of this segment of Pruneridge would restrict east-west pedestrian and bicycle
access between N. Tantau Avenue and N. Wolfe Road. The proposed project would not
fully implement provisions related to circulation in the General Plan due to the proposed
closure of Pruneridge Avenue. Therefore, the Draft EIR concludes that the closure of
Pruneridge Avenue is a significant and unavoidable impact of the project.
A significant impact is also identified due to the rerouting of bus Route 81, because of the
closure of this segment of Pruneridge Avenue. The bus line has been proposed to be
rerouted to travel along Vallco Parkway instead of along Pruneridge Avenue. There are no
feasible mitigation measures to restore this transit access; therefore, the impact is significant
and unavoidable.
5.Noise
The EIR evaluates noise impacts and identifies and discusses mitigation measures to ensure that
noise levels remain below the thresholds identified in the City’s Community Noise Control
Ordinance (Chapter 10.48 of the Municipal Code) and the General Plan. Construction noise will
be mitigated by the implementation of a robust construction management plan and the
installation of a 15-foot temporary sound wall around the perimeter of the site. The sound wall
will be set back as much as feasible to allow line of sight separation between the adjacent
property and the project site.
The project would make a significant contribution to cumulative noise levels along two
roadway segments around the project site, based on thresholds identified in the City’s General
Plan. These roadway segments would experience increases of 1.0 dBA or greater in traffic noise
levels under cumulative plus project conditions and would exceed the more stringent standard
used in the EIR. This will be mitigated to a less-than-significant level by resurfacing these road
segments with Rubberized Hot-Mix Asphalt, or similar quiet pavement. With the
implementation of this measure the project’s contribution to the cumulative impact would be
reduced to a less-than-significant level.
6.Air Quality
The EIR identifies mitigation measures to mitigate the significant air quality impacts during the
construction of the project, including ensuring that all exposed surfaces are watered twice a
day, limiting the vehicle speeds on site to 15 miles per hour, either shutting all equipment not in
use or limiting idling time on site to 2 minutes, suspending all excavation, grading and/or
demolition activity when the wind speeds exceed 20 miles per hour and ensuring that all trucks
and equipment are washed prior to leaving the site. However, even with these mitigation
measures, the impact to Air Quality during construction will remain significant and
unavoidable.
The impact to air quality during operation of the project has also been identified as a significant
impact. While a mitigation measure has been identified to increase the non-single-occupant
Study Session for Apple 2 Campus EIR October 1, 2013
Page 16
vehicle mode share from 28% to 34% (with an associated reduction in vehicle emissions), the
impact will remain significant and unavoidable.
7.Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG) and Sustainability
Greenhouse gas emissions are attributed to global climate change and increases in the average
temperature of the Earth’s atmosphere and oceans in the recent decades. This is primarily
attributed to increased amounts of carbon dioxide and other GHGs as a result of human
activities. GHGs are released by the burning of fossils fuels, land clearing, agriculture and other
activities leading to an increase in the greenhouse effect. GHG emissions are typically measured
in terms of pounds or tons of “CO 2 equivalents” or CO 2 e.
2 e during the four year
The project is anticipated to produce 47,883 metric tons of CO
construction time period. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), the
regional agency that regulates sources of air pollution within the nine Bay Area counties, does
not have an adopted quantitative threshold for construction GHG emission but recommends
the incorporation of construction practices that would reduce emissions. The construction
management plan, which is part of the project and would be enforced through the City’s
conditions of approval, would ensure that specific construction measures are implemented to
reduce construction-related GHG emissions to a less-than-significant level. It is also anticipated
2 e per year net new emissions
that the proposed project will produce 8,745 metric tons of CO
above the August 2011 baseline. The primary sources of emissions associated with the project
are vehicles. This amounts to about 2.7 metric tons of CO 2 e per employee per year, which is
well below the BAAQMD threshold of 4.6 metric tons of CO 2 e per employee per year.
Therefore, these emissions would not be considered significant.
As mentioned earlier, a key requirement of AB 900 is that the California Air Resources Board
(CARB) verifies that the project does not result in any net additional emission of greenhouse
gases, including greenhouse gas emissions from employee transportation. The determination of
significance for the purposes of CEQA utilizes occupancy conditions at the time of the
publication of the Notice of Preparation of the EIR in August 2011. At that time, employment
on the site (4,844 employees) was well below the employee capacity of the site (9,800
employees). The site has historically operated at near or near full capacity; however, the
existing condition reflects Apple’s relocation of its employees in preparation for the project and
Hewlett Packard’s consolidation of its employees in Palo Alto. As part of CARB’s Executive
Order, which confirms that the project does not result in any net additional emissions of GHGs,
including GHGs from employee transportation. Due to the sustainable features and renewable
energy portfolio proposed by the project, the build-out of the proposed project would result in a
2 e when compared with the full occupancy baseline of
net reduction of 16,224 metric tons of CO
9,800 employees.
Study Session for Apple 2 Campus EIR October 1, 2013
Page 17
8.Public Services and Utilities
The EIR identifies a significant impact to the Santa Clara County Fire Department’s ability to
respond in a timely manner in case of an emergency. However, a mitigation measure requiring
the implementation of signal preemption for emergency vehicles would reduce the impact to a
less-than-significant level. No other impacts related to the project’s public services and utilities
have been identified to be significant.
Project Alternatives
The Draft EIR evaluated four project alternatives including the CEQA-mandated No Project
alternative. The alternatives were intended to feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the
project while avoiding or lessening any of the significant effects of the project.
The No Project alternative - existing buildings on site to be fully occupied to accommodate
about 9,800 employees. Pruneridge Avenue would remain a public road.
The Pruneridge Avenue alternative - develop a new campus on the site with same square
footage and configuration while allowing Pruneridge Avenue to remain a public road.
The Reduced Construction alternative- develop a new campus on the site with same
square footage with a configuration similar to that of a traditional office campus with
multiple buildings, surface parking lots, above-grade parking garages, and reduced open
space. Pruneridge Avenue within the site would be vacated. The project site would have
more access points at the perimeter of the site than currently proposed.
The Reduced Density alternative – develop a smaller campus on the site consisting of
approximately 2.2 million square feet of office, research, and development space to
accommodate 8,000 employees, for a total headcount lower than the No Project
alternative. Ancillary and utility development square footage would remain the same.
Pruneridge Avenue within the site would be vacated.
The EIR identifies the Reduced Density alternative as being environmentally superior to the
Pruneridge Avenue and Reduced Construction alternatives because it would avoid or reduce
significant traffic, noise, and air quality impacts due to lower levels of construction and
employment on-site compared to the project. The reduction in operational traffic impacts is
particularly important, because increased traffic affects most members of the community and
was one of the key concerns identified by the community during the EIR scoping session.
Response to Comments and Text Revisions
Over 300 comments were received during the 46-day public review period of the Draft EIR.
Over half of the comments were in support of the project and not regarding the adequacy of the
EIR. Many of the remaining comments were in support of the project. Some had concerns about
the impacts from the increased traffic around the project site.
All comments received during the public review period and that pertain to the EIR have been
addressed in the Responses to Comments Document. Text revisions to clarify text in the Draft
Study Session for Apple 2 Campus EIR October 1, 2013
Page 18
EIR and updates to reflect additional analysis or discussion have also been made. The
Responses to Comments document together with the Draft EIR and Text Revisions to the Draft
EIR are considered to be the Final EIR. Because no new or substantially more severe significant
impacts, and no new mitigation measures or alternatives that would clearly lessen the
significant impacts of the project that the project sponsor declines to adopt, were identified after
circulation of the Draft EIR, recirculation of the EIR is not required.
Comments were also collected after the close of the EIR public review period. As of September
19, 2013, 32 comments were received. Of the 32 comments received after the close of the
comment period, about half supported the project. None of the comments received raised issues
that would require the identification of new impacts, mitigation measures, or project
alternatives, or change the findings of the Draft EIR. While CEQA does not require that the City
respond to the comments received after the close of the public review period, staff will provide
these comments with the agenda packets for the public hearings for the project at Planning
Commission and City Council.
Next Steps
Staff will present the Final EIR to the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) for review and
recommendation on September 26, 2013. A report of the ERC’s recommendation will be
provided to the Planning Commission and City Council at the Study Session. The Final EIR,
General Plan Amendment, Rezoning, Development Agreement, Vesting Tentative Map and
associated permits for the project will be presented to the Planning Commission for review and
recommendation on October 2, 2013. The City Council’s review and decision on the General
Plan Amendment, first reading of the ordinances for the Rezoning (of 1.1. acres from Parks and
Recreation (PR) to Planned Development (Planned Industrial Park) (P(MP)) and Development
Agreement, Vesting Tentative Map, associated permits, and street easements and vacations is
scheduled for October 15, 2013. The second reading for the ordinances is scheduled for
November 19, 2013.
_____________________________________
Prepared by: Piu Ghosh, Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Aarti Shrivastava, Director of Community Development
Approved for Submission by: David Brandt, City Manager
Attachments:
A - SS-1 Apple Campus 2 Project EIR Response to Comments Document, September 2013
B - SS-2 Public Review Draft Apple Campus 2 Project Environmental Impact Report, June 2013